Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 713– 722

www.elsevier.com/locate/compchemeng

Modeling flow and heat transfer in tubes using a fast CFD

formulation
E.R.L. Mercado, V.C. Souza, R. Guirardello, J.R. Nunhez *
Faculdade de Engenharia Quı́mica, UNICAMP, CP 6066, 13083 -970 Campinas, SP, Brazil

Received 10 May 2000; accepted 5 January 2001

Abstract

An approach to study turbulent flow and conjugate heat transfer in tubes is proposed in this work. Instead of using the usual
finite element or finite volume methods, this formulation applies a different technique that calculates both for the flow and heat
transfer. It discretizes the flow in the radial direction using a fourth order finite differences method, which is more accurate than
the traditional second order schemes. Using this technique, a system composed of several ordinary differential equations for the
temperature and a set of linear equations for the velocities and pressure gradient is obtained. The equations are then integrated
in the axial direction using a fourth order Runge–Kutta method. The values of viscosity, density and thermal conductivity are
dependent on temperature, which makes the model suitable for the calculation of high temperature gradients, as in the case of
refinery fired heaters. The turbulence is taken into account using a zero order turbulence model. A very interesting feature of this
formulation is that for the laminar case the method is non-iterative, which makes it more desirable and faster than conventional
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) packages. © 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Turbulent flow; Conjugate heat transfer and fluid flow; Computational fluid dynamics

Nomenclature

C. p Fluid thermal capacity

dP/dz Pressure drop
H Heat transfer coefficient
K Thermal conductivity
kt Turbulent conductivity
K Constant= −(dP( /dz)
lm Mixing length
L Tube length
P Pressure
P( Average pressure (in time)
R Radial position
R Tube radius
T Temperature of fluid
T( Average fluid temperature (in time)
Tw Wall temperature
6q Angular velocity
Vr Radial velocity
6̄r Average radial velocity

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: nunhez@feq.unicamp.br (J.R. Nunhez).

0098-1354/01/$ - see front matter © 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 0 9 8 - 1 3 5 4 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 6 7 2 - X
714 E.R.L. Mercado et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 713–722
Vz Axial velocity
6̄z Average axial velocity (in time)
Z Axial position
Dr Radial distance
Dz Axial distance between points
v Fluid viscosity
vt Turbulent viscosity
z Fluid density
1. Introduction
The heating and cooling inside tubes have been
among the most important processes in the engineering
field such as petrochemical fired heaters and petrol
cracking. The applications are uncountable. The model-
ing of these processes, based on the conservation of
mass, momentum and energy associated with its
boundary conditions, normally lead to a set of partial
differential equations with no analytical solution. Many
details of the flow cannot be captured by experimental
analysis, therefore, numerical procedures are needed to
have a deeper understanding of these processes.
Travello and Dias (1984) have developed a model to
solve the energy equation in tubes under laminar flow.
The fluid is incompressible and it is assumed a
parabolic profile for the axial velocity. The fluid prop-
erties are constant and the work is primarily concerned
to analyze axial conduction at the tube walls.
Faghri and Sparrow (1980) also studied laminar flow
in tubes. They were also interested in determining axial
conduction at the wall of the tubes. They assume a
parabolic profile for the axial velocity and the proper-
ties are considered independent on temperature.
Barozzi and Pagliarini (1985) developed a method
combining the finite element method with the superpo-
sition principle to solve simultaneously the momentum
and energy equations in order to analyze axial conduc-
tion at the walls. The physical properties are also
assumed to be constant.
Bilir (1994) analyzed the conjugated heat transfer in
tubes for laminar flow. He assumed that the wall tem-
perature is constant and he also analyzed axial conduc-
tion at the walls. The physical properties again are
assumed to be constant.
Martinuzzi and Pollard (1989a,b) compared six tur-
bulence models in tubes and interesting detail about the
numerical methods were explained. They arrived at the
conclusion that the low Reynolds number k– m model
better predicts turbulence in tubes. However, physical
properties are also constant.
In order to get more insight of how these systems
behave, a computational fluid dynamics model has been
developed to calculate the velocities, pressure and tem-
perature. The flow can be either laminar or turbulent.
Also, as the fluid properties are dependent on tempera-
ture, the model is suitable to investigate the flow inside
petrochemical fired heaters. The hypotheses of the
model are.
“ The tube wall temperature is assumed to be con-
stant, which is acceptable for the design of fired
heaters (Wimpress, 1963).
“ The flow is steady-state.
“ It is considered that the inlet flow is already fully
developed, because the flow comes from a previous
tube section joined to the tube portion under consid-
eration. This assumption is very important. Other-
wise the radial velocity would not be small and the
model approximations would not apply to the
problem.
“ Radial velocities are small in comparison to the axial
velocities.
“ The flow is symmetric about the axial axis (there is
no variation in the angular direction and angular
velocity is negligible).
“ Physical properties are dependant on temperature,
but not on pressure.
“ There is no phase change and the fluid is a Newto-
nian liquid.
2. Modeling
The exact model equations for tubes are well known
and can be found in textbooks such as (Bird, Stewart &
Lightfoot, 1982). Under the hypothesis described
above, a study of the order of magnitude was applied to
these equations and several terms are negligible in
comparison to others. The resulting equations are de-
scribed as follows, for the laminar and turbulent axi-
symmetric model. It is important to notice that the
radial velocities can be calculated from the continuity
equation, since in this equation both terms are of the
same order of magnitude.
 E.R.L. Mercado et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 713–722 715

2.1. Laminar flow “ Tube wall (r= R).

2.1.1. Momentum conser6ation Vr = 0 (11)

(P
Radial direction.
−k
 (T
= − h(Tw − T) (12)
=0 (1) (r
(r
Axial direction.
 
“ Tube entrance (z= 0).
(P 1 ( (6 At the tube entrance, it is considered that the flow is
0= − + r ·v z (2) already fully developed. It is as if the fluid came from a
(z r (r (r
previous tube section joined to the tube portion under
2.1.2. Energy conser6ation consideration. As already mentioned, this is important
to be considered since the model does not apply for

z · C. p · 6z
(T 1 (
=

r ·k
(T  (3)
situations where radial velocities are high.
A constant temperature profile is assumed for the
(z r (r (r temperature since the wall temperature starts acting on
the fluid only at the section being considered:
2.1.3. Continuity equation
T= To (13)
1 ( ( Mass conservation (05 z5L).
(z · r · 6r)+ (z · 6z ) = 0 (4)
r (r (z
…=
& R
z · 6z · 2 · y · r dr (14)
2.2. Turbulent flow 0

2.2.1. Momentum conser6ation In order to evaluate the turbulent viscosity and ther-
Radial direction. mal conductivity the mixing length hypothesis is as-
sumed (Prandtl theory). The mixing length theory
(P( assumes that:
=0 (5)
(r Turbulent viscosity:
Axial direction. ) )
 
(6̄z
vt = z · l 2m (15)
(P( 1 ( (6̄ (r
0= − + r(v +vt) z (6)
(z r (r (r
Turbulent thermal conductivity:
2.2.2. Energy conser6ation
kt = z · C. p · l 2m
) )
(6̄z
(16)

z · C. p · 6z
(T(
=
1 ( 
r(k + kt)
(T(  (7)
(r

In order to evaluate vt and kt, it is necessary to know

(z r (r (r
the mixing length (lm). There are several expressions for
2.2.3. Continuity equation tubes. The one chosen is by (Rodi, 1984):

1 ( (
lm
=0.14−0.08
r  2

− 0.06
r 4
(17)
R R R
(z · r · 6̄r)+ (z · 6̄z ) = 0 (8)
r (r (z
2.4. Numerical calculation
2.3. Boundary conditions
The fourth order finite differences method is applied
to the radial direction. This leads to a linear set of
“ Symmetry line (r= 0).
 
equations for the velocities and a set of first order
(6z differential equations for the temperature. The dis-
=0 (9) cretization in the radial direction is applied to
(r
 
(T
=0 (10)
(m+1) points and there are (n+ 1) points in the axial
direction. Fig. 1 shows the mesh used for the calcula-
(r tions.
716 E.R.L. Mercado et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 713–722

Fig. 1. Mesh used for the calculations.

2.4.1. Laminar flow 2.4.2. Turbulent flow

Navier –Stokes (from Eq. (1), after integrating in the From the continuity equations and the assumptions
r direction): made, it follows that P= P(z), so the following is true:
(6z )r (P
= i
) (18) −
(P(
(z
=K (21)
(r ri 2vi (z ri
A system of m +1 equations is generated. However, From Eq. (6); after integrating:
there are m+2 unknowns (m + 1 velocities and pres- (6̄z Kr
sure drop). An additional equation is obtained through (v + vt) =− (22)
(r 2
a mass balance in the cross section (Eq. (14)). Integra-

   
tion is performed using Simpson’s rule. The linear From Eq. (15).
system is solved using Gaussian elimination. d6̄z 2
d6̄z K ·r
Energy conservation (from Eq. (2) and isolating − z · f(r) +v + =0 (23)
dr dr 2
(#T/#z)):
(T ) 1  )  )
(k k (T ( 2T )n Therefore the velocities can be calculated by the

)
following relation, which is one root of Eq. (23)
= + i +ki 2 (19)
(z ri zi · ĉpi · 6zi (r ri ri (r ri (r ri (6̄z
v 2i + 2Krizi f(ri )− vi
= (24)
The set of equations is solved by considering the (r ri − 2zi f(ri )
calculation of the axial velocities as a subrouting in the

   n
where:
resolution of the ordinary differential equation given by
2 4 2
(Eq. (19)). The differential equations are solved by the r r
f(r)= R 2 0.14− 0.08 − 0.06 (25)
Runge –Kutta –Fehlberg method, where at each re- R R
quired calculation the axial velocity is obtained by (Eq.
(18)) by solving a set of linear equations.
Continuity equation:

zi · 6ri +ri
( ) (
(z · 6r ) = −ri (z · 6z )
) (20)
(r ri (z zi

Applying finite differences to Eq. (20), a system of

m + 1 linear equations for the radial velocity is ob-
tained and it is solved using Gaussian elimination, after
calculating the values of the axial velocity.
At the tube entrance, a uniform temperature profile
is assumed. From this, all physical properties are calcu-
lated. The axial velocities at the different radial posi-
tions and the pressure drop are calculated according to
Eq. (18) and a set of first order differential equations is
obtained according to Eq. (19), which is calculated
using the fourth order Runge – Kutta method. The pro-
cedure is repeated for the whole length of the tube.
After evaluating all axial velocities, the radial velocities
are calculated according to Eq. (20). Fig. 2. Laminar temperature profile (Re= 1800).
 E.R.L. Mercado et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 713–722 717

A uniform temperature profile is given at the tube

entrance, similar to the linear case. The physical prop-
erties are estimated and a set of linear equations is
obtained for the velocities according to Eq. (24). The
values of the axial velocities are determined as a sub-
routine in the resolution of the ordinary differential
equation given by (Eq. (26)). However, since K appears
non-linearly in (Eq. (24)), an iterative approach is
required for each velocity profile.
The total pressure drop (both for laminar and turbu-
lent flows) is obtained by the numerical integration of
the pressure drop along the tube length. Using Simp-

&
son’s numerical integration:
L
Dz
−DP( = K dz $ [K + 4K2 + 2K3 + 4K4 + ···
0 3 1
+4Kn − 1 + Kn ] (28)

 
where
Fig. 3. Turbulent temperature profile (Re= 13 000).
dP(
K= −
dz
An analytical solution, with an experimental result

)  ) ) )
The energy equation is discretized as follows:
for the velocity near the wall is used for the axial
(T( 1 (ki + kti ) (k (k (T( velocities near the wall for the turbulent flow. This is a
= + + t
(z ri ziĉpi6̄zi (r ri (r ri (r ri
)n
ri similar approach to the Prandtl near wall logarithmic

' '  
( 2T( law.
+ (ki +kti ) (26)
(r 2 ri K ·R K ·R (1/N · R)
6̄zn = 12.85 + ln
2z 0.32z 26(v/z)
(2z/K · R)
) )
The continuity equation:
(29)
( (
zi · 6̄ri +ri (z · 6̄r) = −ri (z · 6̄z ) (27) Where n is the number of intervals in the radial
(r ri (z zi direction.

Fig. 4. Average temperature at the tube outlet as a function of the Reynolds number.
718 E.R.L. Mercado et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 713–722

3. Results and discussion
All results are based on a case study of a tube with
radius r= 0.1 m; wall temperature Tw =90°C and a
temperature at the entrance Te =30°C. Since the tem-
perature varies, it was set a reference temperature
equivalent to the average between Te and Tw for the
calculation of the Reynolds number.
Fig. 2 shows the variation of the temperature in the
axial direction for a Reynolds number of 1800, which is
laminar flow. Fig. 3 shows the variation of the temper-
ature in the axial direction for a Reynolds number of
13 000, which is turbulent flow. As expected, heat trans-
fer is improved for the turbulent flow. It can be easily
noticed that the tube centerline, for the laminar case,
starts to get heated only after 20 m whereas, for the
turbulent flow, it starts after about 7 m. It should be
pointed out that both tubes have the same length, i.e.
z =51 m, which means that the residence time for the
turbulent flow is considerably smaller.
Fig. 4 shows the variation of average radial tempera-
ture at the tube outlet for tube sections having the same
residence time for different Reynolds numbers. It is
clear that heat transfer improves as Reynolds number

Fig. 5. Temperature as a function of the radius (Re=2000).

Fig. 6. Temperature as a function of the radius (Re= 12 000).

 E.R.L. Mercado et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 713–722 719

increases. However, average temperature in the radial
direction does not increase significantly under turbulent
flow. Additionally, results show that only small eleva-
tions on the temperature is noticed for tubes longer
than 20 m. The great temperature variations occur
between 10 and 20 m.
Figs. 5 and 6 show the variation of the temperature
in some given sections as a function of the radius for
laminar and turbulent flow, respectively. As expected,
the turbulent profile is flatter when compared with the
profile of the laminar flow. It can be noticed that it
would be necessary a tube length of 2030 m to obtain a
flat temperature profile (equal to the wall temperature)
at the tube outlet. The turbulent flow, requires 281 m,
nearly a tenth of the value required for the laminar
flow.
Figs. 7 and 8 show the temperature profile along the
axial axis for different radius for laminar and turbulent
flow, respectively.
In order to validate the method, it has been com-
pared against the experimental data obtained by Haber
(1966); Laufer (1952). The data obtained by Laufer is
for air, which is a compressible fluid. However, the
ratio between the air stream and sound velocity in the
fluid (air) is low.
6
M= $ 0
c

Fig. 7. Axial temperature for several radial positions (Re= 2000).

Fig. 8. Axial temperature for several radial positions (Re=12 000).

720 E.R.L. Mercado et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 713–722

where M is the Mach number, 6 the air velocity and c
is the sound velocity at the flow temperature and
pressure conditions.
Since the Mach number is very small, it means that
the air flow behavior is not much different from an
incompressible flow. This analysis is presented in more
detail by Sisson and Pitts (1988). Furthermore, the
physical properties in the model presented in this work
are allowed to vary with the temperature, but not with
the pressure. Figs. 9 and 10 show the velocity profile as
a function of the non-dimensional radius for 41 radial
points and for Reynolds number of 50 000 and 500 000,
respectively. The results are very close.
Figs. 11 and 12 compare the axial velocity as a
function of the non-dimensional radius for the experi-
mental data obtained by Haber. The fluid is water and
the Reynolds numbers are 27 281 and 48 997, respec-
tively. The comparisons are for 21 and 41 radial points.
A good agreement between the model and experimental
data is again obtained.
Fig. 13 shows the pressure gradient as a function of
the tube length. Fig. 14 compares the pressure drop as
a function of the Reynolds number for the model
proposed in this work and the data obtained by Friend
and Metzner (1958) from empirical correlations for
isothermal ideal tubes.
The computational time spent for the laminar cases
was about 1 s, whereas it took about 2 s for the
turbulent case, using a Pentium II 400 MHz for the
calculations.

Fig. 9. Comparison of the model and the experimental data by Laufer (Re= 50 000).

Fig. 10. Comparison of the model and the experimental data by Laufer (Re= 500 000).
 E.R.L. Mercado et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 713–722 721

Fig. 11. Comparison of the model and the experimental data by Haber (Re= 27 281).

Fig. 12. Comparison of the model and the experimental data by Haber (Re=48 997).

4. Conclusion very simple, nevertheless precise. An extension for the

A new and fast CFD method which is able to calcu-
late conjugate heat transfer in tubes with physical prop-
erties depending on temperature is presented in this
paper. The method is particularly suitable for the pre-
diction of temperature and velocities in petrochemical
fired heaters, where a considerable temperature gradient
is present. Results show a very good agreement against
experimental data and the pressure gradient, which can
be critical in these calculations. The wall treatment is
k–m model is under way since it is reported in the
literature it is more suitable than the zero order turbu-
lence models.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank CNPq and FAPESP
for the grants received for this project.
722 E.R.L. Mercado et al. / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 713–722

Fig. 13. Pressure drop as a function of the tube length (Re= 2000 and L= 30 m).

Fig. 14. Pressure drop as a function of the Reynolds number.

References ber 1174. National Aeronautics and Space Administration of the

Barozzi, G. S., & Pagliarini, G. (1985). A method to solve conjugate
heat transfer problems: the case of fully developed laminar flow in
a pipe. Journal of Heat Transfer, 107, 77–83.
Bilir, S. (1994). Laminar flow heat transfer in pipes including two-di-
mensional wall and fluid axial conduction. International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer, 38 (11), 1619–1625.
Bird, R. B., Stewart, W. E., Lightfoot, E. N. (1982). Transport
phenomena. New York
Faghri, M., & Sparrow, E. M. (1980). Simultaneous and fluid axial
conduction in laminar-flow heat transfer. Journal of Heat Trans-
fer, 102, 58 – 63.
Haber, D.F., (1966). The mean velocity distribution in fully devel-
oped turbulent water flow in a straight circular pipe. University
Microphilms Inc, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Laufer, J., (1952). The structure of turbulence in fully developed pipe
flow. National Advisory Committee of Aeronautics, Report num-
USA, Washington, DC, October 28.
Martinuzzi, R. and Pollard, A. (1989a). Comparative study of turbu-
lence in predicting turbulent pipe flow: algebraic stress and k-ep-
silon models of part I, AAIA Journal, 27(1).
Martinuzzi, R. and Pollard, A. (1989b). Comparative study of turbu-
lence models in predicting turbulent pipe flow part II: Algebraic
stress and models, AIAA Journal, 27(12).
Rodi, W. (1984). Turbulence modelling. In Turbulence models and
their application in hydraulics. Germany.
Sisson, L.E. and Pitts, D.R., (1988). Fenômenos de Transporte,
Editora Guanabara.
Travello, J., & Dias, L. A. (1984). Temperature calculation in na
incompressible permanent laminar fluid flow through a circular
pipe with axial conduction and viscosity. International Journal of
Heat Mass Transfer, Great Britain, 27 (6), 1183– 1187.
Wimpress, R. N. (1963). Rating fired heaters. Hydrocarbon Processing
and Petroleum Refiner, 42 (10), 115– 126.